Anonymous #1 said:
Becoming a Muslim in the last few months has made me look at Christmas in a whole new way. I've always known it wasn't Christ's birth day, I knew it was based off pagan lunar calendars as well. But it never really clicked if you know what I mean.
I'm sure I view Christmas the same way atheists do. In reality, Christmas is just a day to get together with friends and family, get high and have nice wine, and relax. I don't get people going all out on the lights and the music is cheese.
Newfound view? The holiday is cool, but lights and songs are "cheese" because you've become muslim? That part makes no sense to me whatsoever.
You seem to know a bit about islam, so I would assume you're not trolling for some reason. But some of the stuff you say strikes me as odd.
Christmas a time to enjoy wine with friends? I thought wine was a christian thing, and muslims don't drink.
Also, you are aware that Christ (whose birthday christmas is supposedly a celebration of--regardless of whether that is not really his actual birth date-- is considered to be a prophet among muslims?
Anonymous #1 said:
The only reason that Prophet Muhammad does not get depicted is because Islam is antithetical to any form of idolatry. If his picture were around there would be a concern that the Muslims were venerating a person and not focus on the word, or message delivered by the Qur'an.
I'm going to somewhat call shenannigans on this one. Not toward you, per se, but rather islam. I think the caution against idolatry isn't a terrible rule for a religion to have. However, the stated purpose is so that the word is more highly venerated than the person. Is that why it's acceptable to hate, curse, deride, or in some cases engage "war" against someone (a non muslim, in this example) who decides they want to depict muhammad in some fashion? Be that for a joke, or a historical documentary, etc?
Likewise with the physical book, the qur'an. I've seen muslims take perceived disrespect to the qu'ran pretty seriously. Which, if the qur'an is supposed to be the word of god and about love etc, would tell me that the WORDS are being respected more than the MESSAGE.
Silly example: Let's say I start a "religion" that preaches peace and love. And I make a set of commandments. 1- Be kind to your fellow man 2- Give alms to the poor 3- Don't drink to excess 4- Don't cause injury to others intentionally except in self defense etc... and let's say in protest some guy burns a copy of my commandments, and someone decides that's a terrible crime, a mob forms, and stones the guy to death. That mob would be acting in violation of the spirit of my actual commandments... thus holding a bunch of LETTERS in higher regard than another human being... or even more ironically, holding a collection of LETTERS on a PAGE in higher regard than the MEANING BEHIND THE LETTERS (how insane is that one?) something I would obviously not like, based on the actual meaning of the text of my commandments.
But I'll admit that I don't understand islam overly-well. Perhaps it is acceptable to cause violence to infidels.
I'm not saying that in attempt to be cheeky or argumentative either-- I legitimately don't know. I've heard stuff indicating the truth lies in either direction.
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 3 all )
Anonymous
